![Trusts & Estates logo Trusts & Estates logo](https://eu-images.contentstack.com/v3/assets/bltabaa95ef14172c61/bltbd5defc64f6009ee/670cf9093dbe55752cb9da04/cf81ba8d-3b13-48d4-9e34-9fad6c8627d7.jpg?width=700&auto=webp&quality=80&disable=upscale)
A Dumont-like HorrorA Dumont-like Horror
Stock concentration cases against fiduciaries just keep getting scarier. The latest fright comes from Hamilton County, Ohio. If the New York case of Dumontsent chills down advisors' spines, Ohio's Fifth Third Bank v. Firstar Bank, No. C-050518 (Sept. 1, 2006), should give them nightmares. In Dumont, the fiduciary had years to diversify a portfolio and failed to do so, despite a beneficiary's entreaties.
John T. Brooks, partner, Foley & Lardner, Chicago, and Rorie M. Sherman, editor in chief, Trusts
Stock concentration cases against fiduciaries just keep getting scarier.
The latest fright comes from Hamilton County, Ohio. If the New York case of Dumontsent chills down advisors' spines, Ohio's Fifth Third Bank v. Firstar Bank, No. C-050518 (Sept. 1, 2006), should give them nightmares.
In Dumont, the fiduciary had years to diversify a portfolio and failed to do so, despite a beneficiary's entreaties. A trial court's decision to fine the fiduciary sent shock waves through the estate-planning community. Ultimately, though, the fiduciary won on appeal.
Now comes this Ohio case. The fiduciary — U.S. Bank National Association, also known as Firstar...
Unlock All Access Premium Subscription
Get Trusts & Estates articles, digital editions, and an optional print subscription. Choose your subscription now and dive into expert insights today!
Already Subscribed?